Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Errors in judging information about reflections in mirrors.
Perception. 2006; 35(9):1265-88.P

Abstract

We investigated people's perception and knowledge of planar mirror reflections. People were accurate at deciding when they could first see their reflection as they approached a mirror from the side, but only if their reflection was visible. Most people stopped too early if the mirror was covered up. People also overestimated the size of the reflection of their face on the surface of a mirror if they were shown a covered mirror. Their accuracy improved somewhat if their reflection was visible but, unlike the first task, they still made striking errors. Perceptual feedback thus improved performance at predicting the behaviour of mirror reflections in both tasks but failed to eliminate errors in the second task. The overestimation of reflection size was not face-specific as it generalised to novel stimuli (paper ellipses) and it was found with both a matching response and for verbal size estimations. The early error in the first task appears to be due to an inaccurate belief that can be overridden by perceptual feedback. The overestimation in the second task is primarily caused by a powerful size-constancy effect.

Authors+Show Affiliations

School of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, Liverpool L69 7ZA, UK. rlawson@liverpool.ac.ukNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

17120845

Citation

Lawson, Rebecca, and Marco Bertamini. "Errors in Judging Information About Reflections in Mirrors." Perception, vol. 35, no. 9, 2006, pp. 1265-88.
Lawson R, Bertamini M. Errors in judging information about reflections in mirrors. Perception. 2006;35(9):1265-88.
Lawson, R., & Bertamini, M. (2006). Errors in judging information about reflections in mirrors. Perception, 35(9), 1265-88.
Lawson R, Bertamini M. Errors in Judging Information About Reflections in Mirrors. Perception. 2006;35(9):1265-88. PubMed PMID: 17120845.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Errors in judging information about reflections in mirrors. AU - Lawson,Rebecca, AU - Bertamini,Marco, PY - 2006/11/24/pubmed PY - 2007/6/20/medline PY - 2006/11/24/entrez SP - 1265 EP - 88 JF - Perception JO - Perception VL - 35 IS - 9 N2 - We investigated people's perception and knowledge of planar mirror reflections. People were accurate at deciding when they could first see their reflection as they approached a mirror from the side, but only if their reflection was visible. Most people stopped too early if the mirror was covered up. People also overestimated the size of the reflection of their face on the surface of a mirror if they were shown a covered mirror. Their accuracy improved somewhat if their reflection was visible but, unlike the first task, they still made striking errors. Perceptual feedback thus improved performance at predicting the behaviour of mirror reflections in both tasks but failed to eliminate errors in the second task. The overestimation of reflection size was not face-specific as it generalised to novel stimuli (paper ellipses) and it was found with both a matching response and for verbal size estimations. The early error in the first task appears to be due to an inaccurate belief that can be overridden by perceptual feedback. The overestimation in the second task is primarily caused by a powerful size-constancy effect. SN - 0301-0066 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/17120845/Errors_in_judging_information_about_reflections_in_mirrors_ L2 - http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1068/p5498?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub=pubmed DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -